Working From Home is Like Saying No to Drugs

I don't know if I get more or less done when I work from home, but I do know that when I have down time at home, I find myself doing things I needed to do anyways (e.g. laundry, dishes, etc.) and that makes me feel better. While at work, I end up reading a bunch of Hacker News articles I don't really care about just because I'm stuck or bored. I also find myself working a little later when at home since I don't need to worry about commuting.

This article is garbage. It can be boiled down to one sentence: "if working from home makes me happy at the cost of productivity, forcing me to come into the office just because it's more productive is the moral equivalent of requiring me to take Adderall."<p>To which the appropriate response is: "bullshit". Requiring someone to take physically harmful and addictive drugs is not even remotely in the same galaxy as requiring them to come into the office. Maybe instead of working today, I'd be happier staying home and reading novels and playing with the cat. You don't get paid to be happy though, you get paid to be productive.

I think the crux of the question is "to what extent is it reasonable for an employer to expect that an employee will change his life to increase his value to the company".<p>There are numerous examples of this. I'm sure plenty of people here have gone drinking on a school night and been useless at work next day due to the resulting hangover. If this happens occasionally you may just get light ridicule, however do it too much and you're probably going to get into trouble.<p>Perhaps you enjoy playing contact sports of some description. Well you might injure your hand and that is going to hurt to your typing speed. At what point is it reasonable for your employer to request you reduce or cease these activities?<p>These things are probably going to be dictated by supply and demand ultimately, a popular device in fiction is a "maverick" character who breaks every rule but people still keep around because he has some particular skill that is of high demand and short supply.<p>It's also dictated by how much an employer can force an externality to an employee. For example if it were legal for a company to mandate adderal use and there was evidence to suggest it improved productivity then you would expect rational companies to mandate it unless the very best programmers uniformly refused to use it.<p>Though adderal may be illegal for this purposes that may not stop it becoming defacto mandated. For example if everyone at work is using and it is known but denied in a <i>nudge</i> <i>wink</i> sort of way. If you are a non using bottom performer who is worried about your upcoming review then there is going to be very strong pressure to use. In other words the company has externalised the legal risk.<p>The way it applies to working from home is that there is historically and currently an expectation that you "go to work" and therefor working from home is a bonus.<p>If it was the other way around and there was an expectation of home working, would that change the equation?

It's kind of what I expected, but all the comments here are actually debating the <i>Are you more productive?</i> question, and the point of the post is that I really don't care anymore.<p>Try examining the other part of the equation: <i>Are you happier?</i> If the answer is no, then WFH probably isn't for you. But, if the answer is yes, perhaps productivity isn't so important?

The Adderall analogy really drives the point home. This is well put, and a powerful message more people (especially those in a position to effect policy) ought to read.

<i>A colleague will say, “Well, it’s nice, but you’re just not as productive as if you were in the office.” Something about the argument never sat well with me, and I’ve finally nailed down what it is: it treats productivity as if it’s the only thing that matters.<p>Frankly, I don’t really care if I am less productive working from home than in the office. Productivity is only one variable in a complex equation. </i><p>It seems like a bad idea to argue with a person (the colleague) who makes claims without any evidence. Are they measuring productivity with some metric, or just guessing?

I think that, like the taboo topic mentioned in the title, the key to success for each person is individual moderation. A little bit of X works for some, a lot works better for others, and maybe not doing X at all is the amount you need. For me it's probably 80 home / 20 office for personal happiness and work life balance.

I sorta read this post and boiled it down as a protracted "I'm doing this because it makes me happier" kinda post. That's great! I'm wary of basing some general policy so heavily on personal happiness, though. It's a highly personal and varying thing. At a personal level, though, happiness/contentment is pretty much paramount. Do what gives you purpose and fulfills you...otherwise what's the point?<p>I guess what I'm saying is if you want to work from home, do it! Making the leap to enabling/convincing everybody else to do it may be a bit of a stretch for me, though. It might not make sense in the general case.

I'm snowed in and working from home right now, but I know I'd get twice as much done in the office and I feel a lot more connected to the product when I'm in the office.<p>Maybe if I worked at home more often I'd have a more stable set-up here with better (multiple + larger) monitors and a workspace I can think in, but as it is, any days I work from home I feel like I'm running about 60%.<p>On the other hand, 2.5hours less commute means longer working for less stress.

I'm more productive at home, but happier at work. For me personally being around my co-workers and joking during the day, getting lunch with them, brings a lot of happiness (jokes, fun discussions, etc). Working from home...aside from all that interaction, I do get more done, but am less happy. When I refer to happiness I'm using the "first world problem" scale.

Actually I think this is a very personal matter.<p>The guy that is saying that he is more productive in the office is probably just as happy with his choice as you are with yours.<p>Actually going to work and working in group and interacting with eachother makes me happy, I get a lot of satisfaction out of my work and I rather work in a team than by myself. My previous project we were at the office all day every day and even then the level of communication was too low. That was probably the type of people that were in the group.<p>But still, standing up, talking with people about the business, being able to point at a screen without the hassle of setting up a conference call is pretty easy.<p>Another thing I like about going to work, when you go home and you had a productive day it's a closed chapter for me. I get in my car, don't think about the project (most of the time) until the next day. It's a good separation between working life and personal life for me.

So this article is addressed to the people that have the option of working from home but choose not to because they think it makes them less productive, and haven't factored their own happiness into that decision. Are there really that many people that fall into this category?

Most people argue that people who work from home are <i>more</i> productive, because of the lack of interruptions and surrounding distractions. Of course, for that productivity boost to be maintained, you also need to resist the temptations of HN, cat gifs, and daytime TV.

For knowledge workers, what constitutes as productivity? Is it completion of tasks in time? If yes, then why does it matter where you work as long as you get it done? Also the solutions to problems you are working on, hardly ever strike you during office hours (there have been so many instances where I've found a solution to a tough problem late into the night while sleeping or dreaming lol). the flip side of working in the office is that you're more connected to the people (if they aren't the grumpy kind) and the company itself. You get a sense of what's going on around you, not just in your immediate team.

I really think he hits the point. I'm happier working from home and because of that I find my self working 'til 1:00am some days because I enjoy my job and I'm grateful I have the flexibility to spend time with my family. Actually, it's past 8:00pm and I'm still working while my kids do homework. And it doesn't feel as "over-time". I also like office time, but I get enough of telecommuting and people after a day or two. Also, working from home means virtual meetings, just remember to mute your mic before farting!

Employers in knowledge fields have a tough time scaling pay with performance or productivity (pg's essays cover this), so we see them exploring other methods like remote work and free food, etc. I guess when the employer agrees to let you work from home, your perceived value is high enough that satisfying you with money only would be painful. But as you spend more time at home, they start noticing your value less, which leads to the whole "people are more productive at the office" mentality.

These sort of posts always amaze me. Nearly everyone I know optimizes their life for more time at home. We eschew bonuses in favour of a shorter work week. Or more holiday or longer lunch breaks or shorter commute.<p>When, inevetably the overtime requests come pouring in, or the new boss hates people leaving 'early' then people start looking around for new oppertunities.<p>Taking an hour out of each day usually shortens the commute by 50% - if your day is 9:30 - 4:30 == happy times.

"Am I more productive?, look at the other side and ask, Am I happier? If the answer is no, then working from home probably isn’t for you. If the answer is yes, then think hard about how valuable productivity is versus your own happiness."<p>This is great advice <i>if you're self employed or can pick and choose employers</i>.<p>The other point of the article, that forcing people to come to the office is somehow morally wrong, is nonsense.

I am productive at home, but I'm less happy. I need people to be happy and at home, I just have myself (and my cat). At work, i have my colleagues who energize me, distract me, make me laugh, teach me new things. The biggest reason I don't work from home isnt about productivity. It's because at home nobody's phone rings to the tune of Lady Gaga and nobody tells stupid jokes that make me laugh even while the site is crashing.

The thing is, its not the same for everyone. Working from home makes you happy ? Really cool, but for me it makes me depressed sitting there alone all day.

It's a great analogy!<p>However, I would argue that one can be as productive working at home as working at the office, sometimes even be more productive.<p>Little things that I can do at home that I can't do at the office (ie. Nap) help to focus better. It just a personal experience but it might be true for other people as well.

&#62; <i>"I’ve finally nailed down what it is: it treats productivity as if it’s the only thing that matters. Frankly, I don’t really care if I am less productive working from home than in the office."</i><p><i>You</i> may profess to not care, but your employer <i>certainly</i> cares how productive you are. That's why they're paying to employ you, after all. And, in the long run, people's salaries depend on their productivity.<p>If working from home is so important to your happiness, then find an employer who will let you, but be prepared to settle for a smaller paycheck. But beware of saying things like "frankly, I don't really care if I am less productive" -- that's not exactly a professional attitude.<p>You may choose to be less productive, but to not even <i>care</i> about the effects of your choices on others, sounds like someone who is not exactly cut out for working together with others. In a healthy company, the company cares about the well-being of its employees, and the employees care about the well-being of the company, which is dependent on their productivity.

I would assume that from a management perspective a slight dip in productivity is worth it if it means that the office atmosphere doesn't stink of upset moods.<p>If it doesn't bother them, then I would also assume that they're accustomed to such smells and quite a few other messy things.

I love working from home.<p>I can get all of my work done and have time left over to work on my startup. Since I'm not using my company's network, it's less of a risk for me.<p>It also feels like I'm working for myself. I'm not stuck in a stuffy office all day.

&#62;what if your employer started handing out Adderall every morning?<p>I wonder if that's as uncommon as the OP thinks. I once worked for a rather large media/advertising company and they actually did that. We called it "Focus Fridays"

1. challenge your friend to come up with a productivity metric. 2. outperform your friend in the productivity metric, while working from home. 3. profit! (be productive AND happy; a novel concept, i know...)

I thought the article was going to be about how it's easier said than done, but usually works out fine...

that which cannot be measured cannot be improved. measure what matters. <a href="http://blogs.hbr.org/video/2013/03/measure-employee-productivity.html" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.hbr.org/video/2013/03/measure-employee-producti...</a>

You may not care but your employer might.

So, this is a really bad analogy that tries to force the bad connotations of drug use onto working in the office. And it's kind of ridiculous that this is almost a reasonable logical step from the previous arguments for working from home. That aside, I'll say this: maybe Adderall isn't the drug for you. If the office you work at makes you personally unhappy, it doesn't prove that working from home is better, but that your office sucks.<p>Find a new office and stop comparing personal preferences to actually addictive drugs.